5 18. In addition, the State alleges that there are other facts supporting the inadmissibility of the petition, making reference to the country’s political context. It indicates that at time of the original petition, authorities who belonged to the same political party that had been in power for more than 60 years were still in government, until the general elections of April 20, 2008 produced a democratic change in government, displacing the Colorado Party that had been in power since 1947 and installing an alliance of opposition political parties and social groups. 19. Finally, bearing in mind the time elapsed and the situation created with respect to the criminal case against those allegedly responsible for the crimes of torture denounced by Mr. Jorge Luis López Sosa, the Paraguayan State indicated in its submission that it assumed certain commitments both to the alleged victim and the IACHR. In this regard, it indicated that it assumed the commitment to fully respect procedural deadlines, taking responsibility for administrative, civil, or criminal prosecution arising from the failure of responsible public officials to honor such deadlines. 20. In a communication dated July 5, 2012, the State reported that in the criminal case for the crime of “bodily injury in the performance of public duties” with respect to Mr. Jorge Luis López Sosa a preliminary hearing was set for July 24, 2012, stipulating that in that case the alleged victim was a complainant against the accused and that he is represented by counsel. IV. ANALYSIS OF ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence of the Commission ratione materiae, ratione personae, ratione temporis, and ratione loci 21. The petitioner is empowered by Article 44 of the American Convention to submit complaints to the IACHR. The petition indicates as the alleged victim Jorge Luis López Sosa and his family, with respect to whom Paraguay agreed to respect and guarantee the rights enshrined in the American Convention. With respect to the State, Paraguay has been a party to the American Convention since August 24, 1989, the date on which it deposited the respective ratifying instrument. Therefore, the Commission is competent ratione personae to examine the petition. 22. The Inter-American Commission is competent ratione loci in that the alleged human rights violations occurred in a State that is party to the American Convention. 23. The petitioner, for his part, refers to violations of rights established in the American Convention so that in the case under review the IACHR is competent ratione materiae. In addition, the Inter-American Commission is competent ratione temporis given that the obligation to respect and guarantee the rights protected in the American Convention was already in effect for the State on the date when the facts alleged in the petition would have occurred. It is also competent to hear violations of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (IACPPT) in that Paraguay has been a party to that treaty since March 9, 1990, when it deposited the respective ratifying instrument. B. Other requirements for admissibility of the petition 1. Exhaustion of domestic remedies 24. Article 46.1.a of the American Convention requires the prior exhaustion of the remedies available in the domestic jurisdiction in accordance with generally recognized principles of international